AMD Radeon R5 M435 vs Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a narrow but clear outcome: the AMD Radeon R5 M435 edges out the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 in the single available compute test. On Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD part scores 5859 against Intel’s 5712, a 2.6% advantage. Both GPUs sit at the 33rd percentile among all GPUs, meaning they occupy the same performance tier.

For users choosing strictly from this data, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 is the pick when raw OpenCL compute throughput is the priority. Its win is modest but consistent, and it also carries a more modern API stack, including Vulkan 1.2.170 versus Intel’s Vulkan 1.0. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300, meanwhile, offers a lower thermal envelope at 15 W TDP, but the fact pack does not list a TDP for the AMD part, so a direct power comparison cannot be made. The Intel solution also relies on system-shared memory, which simplifies the platform design but leaves bandwidth as “System Dependent” — a variable that could hurt in memory-sensitive workloads. The AMD card has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth, a fixed specification that removes memory uncertainty. The verdict: the AMD Radeon R5 M435 for compute performance and dedicated memory; the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 for a lower-power, integrated approach where the system architecture already dictates the memory setup.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R5 M435 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC, built around the Jet chip. It integrates 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. This is a discrete-style part, though it is listed as IGP slot width, with a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300, in contrast, is a Generation 8.0 architecture part on Intel’s own 14 nm process, using the Broadwell GT3e chip. Its transistor count and die size are not listed in the fact pack, so no density comparison is possible. It connects via a Ring Bus rather than a PCIe interface, reflecting its integrated position in a Broadwell processor. The Intel part’s memory system is entirely shared with the host — size, type, and bus width are all “System Shared,” and bandwidth is “System Dependent.”

Compute resources differ notably. The AMD GPU has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The Intel GPU has 384 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 6 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the AMD part achieves higher pixel throughput: 8.240 GPixel/s versus 4.800 GPixel/s. The Intel part counters with higher texture throughput: 38.40 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is close: AMD’s 659.2 GFLOPS FP32 edges out Intel’s 614.4 GFLOPS.

Clock behavior also diverges. The AMD GPU runs at a 780 MHz base with a 1030 MHz boost, while the Intel GPU starts at 300 MHz base and boosts to 800 MHz. The AMD memory clock is 1125 MHz with 4.5 Gbps effective, whereas the Intel memory clock is simply “System Shared.”

API support shows generational differences. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1) and OpenGL 4.6 on the AMD side versus OpenGL 4.4 on Intel. The largest gap is Vulkan: AMD supports version 1.2.170, while Intel only reaches 1.0. Display outputs are platform-dependent for both: “Portable Device Dependent” for AMD and “Motherboard Dependent” for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859, which is 2.6% higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300’s 5712.

Q: How does the AMD part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M465 (5841), but 1.2% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 730 (5929) and 1.6% behind both the AMD Radeon HD 8730M (5955) and NVIDIA Quadro K620M (5957).

Q: What are the memory configuration differences?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 uses system-shared memory where size, type, and bus width are all “System Shared” and bandwidth is “System Dependent.”

Q: Which GPU has better pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 achieves 8.240 GPixel/s, which is substantially higher than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300’s 4.800 GPixel/s. This is despite the Intel part having more shading units.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.4, and Vulkan 1.0. The AMD part has the newer Vulkan and OpenGL support.

Q: What is the difference in process node and release timing?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 is built on a 28 nm TSMC process and was released on May 14, 2016. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 uses a 14 nm Intel process and was released on September 4, 2014.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon R5 M435 | Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Generation 8.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 690 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | Not listed |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 780 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1030 MHz | 800 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1125 MHz / 4.5 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Memory Size | 2 GB GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 36.00 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 320 | 384 |

| TMUs | 20 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 6 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.240 GPixel/s | 4.800 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.60 GTexel/s | 38.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 659.2 GFLOPS | 614.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 15 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | Ring Bus |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | Motherboard Dependent |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.0 |

| Release Date | 2016-05-14 | 2014-09-04 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark in the fact pack is Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon R5 M435 posts 5859 points, while the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 scores 5712. The delta is 2.6% in favor of AMD. This is a narrow margin, but it is a win nonetheless, and the head-to-head record reflects that: AMD takes 1 win, Intel takes 0.

Contextualizing this result through each GPU’s nearest rivals clarifies where they sit. The AMD part’s 5859 score places it between the Intel UHD Graphics 730 (5929, 1.2% higher) and the AMD Radeon R7 M465 (5841, 0.3% lower). The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300’s 5712 score sits between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX (5721, 0.1% higher) and the AMD Radeon HD 8790M (5691, 0.4% lower). Both GPUs are firmly in the mid-pack of low-end to mid-range mobile graphics.

The performance gap between the two is smaller than the gap each faces to its own nearest rival. AMD’s 2.6% lead over Intel is larger than Intel’s 0.1% deficit to the GeForce GTX 670MX, but smaller than AMD’s 1.6% deficit to the Radeon HD 8730M. In practical terms, the OpenCL scores are nearly interchangeable — the 147-point difference between 5859 and 5712 is within the noise of typical benchmark variance. However, the data records a definitive winner, and that winner is the AMD Radeon R5 M435.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M435 wins the compute benchmark outright. Its 5859 OpenCL score tops Intel’s 5712, and its 659.2 GFLOPS FP32 throughput is higher than Intel’s 614.4 GFLOPS. The AMD part also wins on pixel fill rate, delivering 8.240 GPixel/s versus Intel’s 4.800 GPixel/s — a 71.7% advantage. This suggests the AMD GPU is better suited to workloads that involve heavy pixel shading or output to framebuffers. Its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth eliminates reliance on system memory, which is a clear advantage for consistent performance in memory-bound tasks.

The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 wins on texture throughput. Its 38.40 GTexel/s is 86.4% higher than AMD’s 20.60 GTexel/s, driven by 48 TMUs versus 20. This makes the Intel part more capable in texture-heavy workloads such as filtered sampling or certain image processing operations. The Intel GPU also has more shading units (384 versus 320), though this does not translate to a win in either FP32 or pixel rate. Its 15 W TDP is listed, whereas AMD’s is not, so the Intel part has a documented power advantage, though no direct comparison is possible.

The AMD Radeon R5 M435 also wins on software ecosystem longevity. Its Vulkan 1.2.170 support is substantially newer than Intel’s Vulkan 1.0, and its OpenGL 4.6 is ahead of Intel’s 4.4. For applications leveraging newer API features, the AMD part is the safer choice. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300, by virtue of being integrated with system-shared memory, wins in platform simplicity — no dedicated memory allocation is needed, and the Ring Bus interface ties it directly into the host processor’s memory hierarchy.

Use-case split follows the data. Choose the AMD Radeon R5 M435 for compute tasks, pixel-heavy rendering, or workloads that benefit from dedicated memory and newer API features. Choose the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 for texture-heavy workloads, or for systems where a 15 W integrated GPU with shared memory is the preferred platform design.